"Dr. Jerry Phillips, a scientist who did cell phone safety research funded by Motorola speaks of how Motorola attempted to control the "message" and outcomes of his research. Excerpt from the movie "Public Exposure: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJbCa-MZwXM"
Check out the Schools Section of the National Association for Children and Safe Technology here: http://www.nacst.org/school.html
_______________________________________
Safe Technology What is considered safe technology? This section helps to define what that means. Information on the impacts of technology on human relationships, the environment and other species is also included.
Risks at Home We identify the many sources of EMR and EMF present in the modern home and some of the variables that influence risk. (Fortunately, there are many solutions that can be found to lower risks!)
Cell Phones Take an in depth look at cell phones and the concerns addressed on this page. Also includes important information on the fine print warnings no one ever reads!
Laptops Did you know laptops should not be placed on your lap? Learn more about how to use laptops more safely and read some of the research that has been done.
Creating a Safe Home Specific suggestions are made to help you completely eliminate or reduce exposures to EMF / EMR in your home.
Baby Monitors Take an in depth look at baby monitors and the concerns that are addresses on this page. Also includes research on baby monitors.
Wifi Routers Get the facts on Wi-Fi Routers which are very similar to mini-cell phone towers in your home! Read the fine print warnings here as well.
This paper has been prepared in order to demonstrate the existence of numerous conflicts of interest among the members of the international organization ICNIRP (International Commission on Non Ionizing Radiation Protection. In Castilian, the International Commission for Non-ionizing radiation), that despite its private nature, is recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO) as reference entity to set limits of exposure for people of non-ionizing radiation in order to prevent such radiation affect your health.
The fact that the members of the organization engage in various conflicts of interest, being related to companies interested in the development of telecommunications and new technologies, undermines the impartiality that should govern the regulation of limits on non-ionizing radiation people.
It’s incomprehensible that an international organization such as WHO, which has numerous and qualified public resources to establish adequately these limits, has delegated to a private organization issues affecting public health of all humanity.
The information contained in the work presented below was obtained from searches of reliable publicly available sources on the Internet, which can be checked by anyone who has an interest in this topic."...
by Mary Adkins, M.Ed., posted on haltmasmartmeters.org,
25 February 2016
I’m writing in response to a recent television news story (Turn to 10/NBC News Brian Crandall) about North Kingstown teacher Shelley McDonald. She is the teacher the NK School Committee recently voted to fire, supposedly for insubordination:http://turnto10.com/news/local/north-kingstown-teacher-says-shes-being-fired-because-she-believes-wifi-is-health-hazard Contrary to the school’s position, the fact pattern suggests (and I’m sure every teacher attending the school committee meeting would concur) that Ms. McDonald is actually being retaliated against for bringing concerns about the health hazards of WiFi to the attention of the public.
I am intimately familiar with this issue (and the retaliation that goes along with speaking out about it) as my own two children were irreparably harmed after industrial strength wireless networks were installed in their public charter and public district schools here in Rhode Island. These installations were accomplished without parental notification about the class 2b carcinogen (electromagnetic radiation) being emitted by the WiFi access points and other wireless devices (laptops, SmartBoards, etc.). Parents were never given the facts about these installations, and as a result it took a long time to make the connection between the progression of my children’s symptoms and the radiation being emitted by the wireless devices in their schools. Unfortunately by the time the pieces of the puzzle fit together, the damage was already done and my kids had developed what I’ve been told will be a lifelong, permanent and disabling sensitivity.
Potentially life threatening symptoms can result in a person who is reactive to wireless radiation, including (but not limited to) an allergic-like mast cell/histamine response which leads to excessive production of thick mucus that clogs the airway and digestive tract, interfering with normal respiratory and digestive functioning. Emerging evidences suggests cardiac effects from the mast cell response as well. The standard, knee-jerk public response (promulgated by well funded industry spinmasters) include “tin foil hat” comments and outright ridicule when it is suggested people can be made sick by wireless radiation. The harsh reality is that those who are affected–very often children and teachers, because of their chronic exposure—are experiencing disabling asthmatic-like episodes, immunological dysfunction, chronic sinusitis, choking/anaphylaxsis, respiratory infection, digestive problems, seizures, strokes, heart arrhythmia, neurological damage and more after exposures of high enough intensity or duration. This is no laughing matter, and it’s not a matter of opinion but a matter of scientific fact, as inconvenient as this may be for those who are helplessly addicted to their wireless gadgets.
The mast cell/histamine response to electromagnetic radiation is well documented by Olle Johansson, PhD of the prestigious Karolinska Institute, which awards the Nobel prize for medicine. Similar mast cell response symptoms have been reported by parents across the country who claim the onset of their children’s respiratory, digestive, neurological, and/or cardiac problems began after installation of WiFi networks in their children’s schools. Onset of heart arrhythmia upon exposure to 2.45 GHz radiation (same frequency as WiFi) has been noted by researcher Magda Havas, PhD of Trent University in her published research, something that should give parents grave cause for concern considering defibrillators are now a standard fixture in all our schools.
Having worked for the Department of Defense as a conscientious servant of the public trust, I grew deeply disturbed as I uncovered more and more scientific studies disproving the common myth (perpetuated by the schools) that WiFi is “safe,” research I undertook after my own children became sick. I realized very quickly that school officials had not done their homework before rolling out this technology in our schools. Just because something is popular, convenient, and offered for sale does not mean it is safe—think about the damage done by Big Tobacco, Lead Paint, Asbestos, and pesticides over the last century. My personal research confirmed what scientists worldwide have known for many decades—that the pulse modulated, radio frequency/microwaves being emitted by these wireless access points and other wireless devices (including cell phones and wireless utility AMR and AMI “smart” meters) are not safe at all. These devices are actually, one could argue, emitting the equivalent of weapons-grade microwaves, and people are consistently reporting symptoms that would tend to validate that description.
In the case of WiFi in schools those emissions are effectively irradiating our children and school staff all day long, whether wireless devices (laptops, iPads, SmartBoards, etc.) are in use or not because the wireless access points emit radiation 24/7. And even more absurdly, these devices have been installed (in the form of wireless routers/access points) literally over the heads of our children and teachers in the classroom. After my two children were made irreversibly ill from the radiation produced by the WiFi networks in their school, I attempted to prevent others from suffering the same fate. I approached our Superintendent, the School Committee, then-Commissioner of RI Department of Education, Deborah Gist, as well as the RI Dept. of Health with stacks of research, imploring them all to take action. ALL of these individuals/agencies seemingly ignored my concerns, along with the overwhelming evidence of harm I provided to them. Instead of taking action they installed more WiFi, and sought out additional taxpayer dollars to do it.
To the best of my knowledge, not once did any of these school officials consult with the scientists whose contact information I provided to them, with the exception of one former school committee member (a scientist himself) who it appeared recognized the harm that was being done after reviewing the studies I provided. He said he would try to “mitigate the damage,” but subsequently lost his bid for re-election. I was eventually forced to remove my children from school after officials committed what one could argue are unlawful acts, namely discriminating against my children and refusing to accommodate their disability (a disability which one could argue THEY created) in order that my children could safely access their education.
Do you suppose this apparent local and statewide systematic collusion to ignore the “canaries in the coal mine” is due to the fact that these schools received millions in free federal funds as part of the Race to the Top and E-Rate programs? Not to mention all the local and state funds that were sought in support of the Wireless Classroom Initiative, even though the fact pattern suggests that by this time local school officials and former RIDE Commissioner Deborah Gist were all well aware that the “canaries” were starting to fall. Why would any responsible public official add more WiFi when children were already getting sick and there were decades of research to substantiate the harm being done by this technology?
One could argue it was because school officials didn’t want to turn away those free funds, nor did they want to admit that they may have been negligent in installing this technology in the first place. You see, many of these same officials have received lucrative bonuses, promotions, and career accolades for building up these “state-of-the-art” wireless networks. Most have built their career legacies on the premise that wireless technology is “necessary” and “safe” (neither of which are true, based on what I’ve learned). So while technology certainly has its place at school, WiFi is simply a MEANS of access—it is NOT a necessity.
That access can be achieved safely, readily, and much more inexpensively via hardwired computer connections that were already in place and have been successfully used for many years. Yet the “modus operandi” amongst school officials seems to be denial of the harm (is this to avoid liability?) as well as perpetuation of the telecom-promoted myth that WiFi is necessary and children can’t be educated without it. Was this done to justify spending taxpayer dollars for something our kids don’t actually need, while reaping the personal financial benefits that resulted from moving forward with these wireless initiatives? One also has to ask: Did RIDOH help perpetuate this fraud because they mistakenly turned a blind eye during a pivotal moment when the harm was brought to their attention and something could have/should have been done? Or does RIDOH really know better than all the top scientists in this field? Which ones did they consult? I’m guessing it was none of them, which might explain why I’ve seen no signed affidavit from RIDOH to date that confirms the unequivocal safety of WiFi.
This denial on the part of school and state officials is happening all over the country as children and teachers continue to report they are getting sick from WiFi. See Child G vs. Fay School in Massachusetts, which will be headed to trial in August: https://scoopfeeddotnet.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/complaint-childg-v-fay-filed.pdf Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is obviously a growing, nationwide problem, as evidenced by the huge numbers of organizations that have sprung up in support of people who are suffering, as well as a special forum recently held by our own RI Governor’s Commission on Disabilities this past August.
The RIGCD forum was specifically scheduled to accommodate and hear the concerns of the growing numbers of people who have become disabled by their exposure to wireless devices (many of them unknowingly exposed in the workplace, like NK teacher Ms. McDonald). People are becoming sick because most employers (particularly schools) have NOT duly informed employees that WiFi networks emit potentially hazardous levels of electromagnetic radiation, a notification that seems to be required by law under the RI Hazardous Substances Right-to-Know Act (see R.I.G.L. §28-21-2(13). When brought to the attention of the RI Dept. of Labor, however (by myself), nothing was done. In the meantime I’ve watched Ms. McDonald and countless children and teachers develop symptoms of electrosensitivity.
Radiation generated by wireless devices is a class 2b carcinogen, designated as such by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). By the same token, parents are not being informed of the toxic school environment that their children are being subjected to every day either, so they don’t make the connection between their children’s symptoms and the exposure to WiFi. See dosimeter results from a child’s typical school day here and learn about what kinds of symptoms can result from exposure:http://safetechforschoolsmaryland.blogspot.com/2015/12/122015-lawsuit-headed-to-trial-for.html
For the past six years, the fact pattern suggests there is a systematic coverup taking place at a local and state level. This coverup is being perpetrated by both local and state officials on the issue of WiFi in schools, not just in North Kingstown but throughout the state and across the country. The public trust is being egregiously violated as the equivalent of a slow-motion genocide is carried out in plain sight, all under the guise of wanting to provide your child with a “21st Century education.” Unfortunately that “21st Century education” comes at a very steep price for our children and teachers, one that is frankly not worth dying for.
“Alarming” rates of chronic absenteeism at the high school have been reported in my local paper, and I’m aware there are growing numbers of children being forced into home based instruction and/or dis enrolling (attending home school or private school) due to illness and/or inability to function in the school environment. Rates of ADHD, learning disabilities, and autism spectrum disorders are skyrocketing. I receive numerous reports from other parents, as well as my children’s friends (who are still in school), that large numbers of students are suffering from headaches/migraines, cognitive deficits, attention difficulties, heart arrhythmia, nausea, dizziness, respiratory symptoms, digestive problems, fatigue, and more in our schools—all are symptoms consistent with microwave sickness/electrosensitivity. The same symptom pattern is being reported by teachers, such as Ms. McDonald.
Along with growing reports of sick children, five teachers/staff members have died in my local high school since I first brought my concerns about WiFi to my local school district here in South Kingstown. I want to know why these teachers are dying, and why my tax dollars are being used to support a technology that scientists worldwide claim is not safe. One of those teachers was my neighbor (a 35 year old mother of three). She relayed to me a long list of her symptoms that I clearly recognized to be consistent with microwave sickness, but by that time she already had cancer. She explained she had been an amazingly healthy woman—that is, until the day she walked into the door of our local school for her first teaching job, when all her symptoms began. She is dead now, and her children are without a mother. And though many have (and will) repeatedly chastise me for bringing up these dead teachers, I would argue that they deserve a voice as they are no longer here to speak for themselves. And in my mind, their deaths are unacceptable and tragic, particularly in light of the data I delivered on a silver platter to my local school officials. Data that I could argue my public school district failed to act on.
There is a public health crisis in the making, and while school officials ignore the obvious and stick their heads in the sand, the telecom companies continue to reap record profits off the backs of our children and teachers, and (one could argue) causing permanent damage in the process. Our kids and school staff are being irradiated with a class 2b carcinogen for 6-8 hours per day—such an assault on the human body is not without consequence. Electromagnetic radiation is pumping out of those industrial-strength access points co-located throughout the school, along with multiple wireless devices (laptops, iPads, etc.), all transmitting simultaneously. Interestingly though, I doubt you’ll see one of those access points installed over the heads of school officials inside THEIR offices. No, instead those access points are in the classrooms, hallways, libraries, gymnasiums, and cafeterias—places where children and teachers congregate and thus they bear the brunt of the exposure.
It’s my opinion these access points are configured, installed, and operated in a manner that is not consistent with applicable safety guidelines (guidelines which were never biologically based in the first place). Scientists worldwide agree, as does the American Academy of Environmental Medicine and the American Academy of Pediatrics. I state my viewpoint as an educated, intelligent person who has taken the time to do thousands of hours of personal research on behalf of my children—without any conflicts of interest. I come to my conclusions in light of my professional background, having worked for DoD in a capacity where I became accustomed to documenting how people bend the rules and/or look the other way, taking shortcuts that could end up costing people their lives. I state my opinion (backed up by scientific fact) as a mother who has watched her children suffer needlessly because people didn’t take the time to do their jobs properly, and I am understandably angry. And rest assured, I and the Shelley McDonalds of the world are NOT going away.
Current safety guidelines are irrelevant because they are not biologically based. Read that statement again, because it couldn’t be more clear. Additionally, there is a blatant ERROR in those guidelines (namely, the omission of the fact that every human cellular process is controlled by electrical fields). This omission/error in current standards has been identified repeatedly in the public domain, but public officials are failing to act despite this. To make it simple…people–namely, IT/engineer types without the proper, multidisciplinary training which includes biological expertise–neglected to understand that human cells are actually controlled via exquisitely sensitive electrical fields. And yet those same people who lacked the necessary skills/training developed guidelines for the rest of us pertaining to human safety, without taking those human electrical fields into consideration. Dr. Martin Pall perhaps explains best what happens biologically upon exposure to wireless radiation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pjt0iJThPU0
Omitting this key parameter—neglecting to consider the electrical fields generated by every cell in the human body and how microwaves affects those fields—renders it impossible to establish unequivocally “safe” levels, especially in chronic exposure situations. The result is safety guidelines that are deeply flawed and protect NO ONE, least of all our children and teachers who are sitting in this toxic microwave soup all day long. Those same IT/engineering types at our local schools (who also lack expertise in the biological sciences) have blindly relied on those inadequate guidelines (developed by their own kind) to proclaim it therefore “safe” to irradiate your child for 6-8 hours per day, 180 days per year! Is there anything more absurd than this? Yes, sadly there is: The endorsement of their actions by our local Superintendents, School Committees, RIDE, and RIDOH—all of whom are also lacking in the appropriate multidisciplinary expertise, but yet don’t bother to pick up the phone to consult with world-renowned experts who DO have the necessary training and decades of experience.
Despite Ms. McDonald, myself, and many other parents bringing all of this information to the attention of school and state officials, there has been a systematic denial of the overwhelming evidence of harm. Stacks of scientific studies (thousands of them) have been dismissed outright. School medical consultants with no expertise in the biological effects of radiation are doing (what the fact pattern suggests) is the equivalent of a 5 minute google search in order to back up their employers’ (the schools’) claims that WiFi is safe for our children, all the while ignoring mountains of decades-old as well as current research to the contrary, as well as the insistence of scientists worldwide that we are in the midst of a public health crisis like none we’ve ever seen: https://www.emfscientist.org/
There is an elephant in the classroom, and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that school officials are playing Russian Roulette with our children’s lives. Now they’re railroading Ms. McDonald out of a job, too, simply for having the guts to stand up and bring attention to their negligence. It’s time for everyone involved to be held accountable and to stop attacking the canaries, who are, quite frankly, already suffering enough.
When this kind of collusion/coverup occurs within the ranks of the Department of Defense, heads historically roll and the people responsible are rightfully convicted of crimes and sent to jail. This is exactly where, in my opinion, those who are responsible for perpetrating this terrible fraud upon the public trust and these crimes upon our children belong—in jail. Every single last one of them, including the unethical legal professionals who stood by and did nothing, encouraging school officials to move forward with installing this technology despite the mounting evidence of harm. There is no excuse for the inaction of our public officials on this issue. History will vindicate Ms. McDonald, as well as the rest of us who stood up all along for the welfare of our children and teachers.
Sincerely, Mary Adkins, M.Ed. Rhode Island Regional Director Citizens for Safe Technology citizensforsafetechnology.org (Former Configuration Manager, Mark 48 Advanced Capability Torpedo Program, Dept. of Defense/NUWC)
"A Silicon-valley engineer turned technology health advocate, Jeromy Johnson discusses our attachment to technology and the health hazards such an addiction may hold.
Jeromy Johnson is an expert in mitigating the negative impacts of Electromagnetic Field (EMF) exposure. He has a leading website on the topic and consults with individuals, families and organizations around the world to implement solutions that reduce and eliminate EMF pollution. Jeromy has an advanced degree in Civil Engineering and has worked in Silicon Valley for 15 years. After becoming what medical doctors call “Electro-hypersensitive” (EHS) in 2011 after extensive exposure to EMF radiation, he embarked on a journey of regaining his own health and educating others to critically evaluate theirs."...
‘If we are to deliver on the promise of digital technology to enhance democratic dialogue and facilitate human lifestyles, then we have to make sure it is environmentally safe to use, particularly for the generations to come.”
FACT #1 Children absorb more of this radiation than adults.
“The average exposure from use of the same mobile phone is higher by a factor of 2 in a child’s brain and higher by a factor of 10 in the bone marrow of the skull.” -The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer’s (IARC) 2011 Monograph on Radio Frequency Fields; the complete monograph is downloadable on the IARC web site. The picture [above] shows how wireless radiation penetrates the brain of a five year old deeper than an adult.
FACT #2 US exposure standards do not protect children. Standards are 18 years old and based on the radiation absorption into a model of 200-pound, 6-foot tall male brain (called the SAM). Wireless radiation standards do not protect the 97% of the population with heads smaller than this adult male SAM model. Read more about children's absorption compared to adults and all about the research that informed the picture above here."
...
"FACT #7 The United States is lagging behind on protections for children. The governments of France, Belgium, Israel, Finland, Russia, India and the European Union have all taken steps toward reducing children’s exposure to radiation from wireless devices – ranging from banning the marketing of cell phones to children under 14 to restricting wireless routers at schools. The latest nation to join in this precautionary principle is Belgium. As of March 1, 2014, sale and advertising of cell phones especially designed for children under the age of 7 years old is banned, as is advertising for cell phones during children's programs on TV, radio, and the internet. Recently, France's National Assembly passed legislation banning Wi-Fi from nursery schools and strongly recommended wired connections rather than Wi-Fi until safety is proven."
"Since June, 2014, there have been more than 70 televised news stories on wireless radiation risks in the U.S. TV stations were most likely to report news stories on cell phone radiation health risks including stories that focused on risks to children. The next most common stories discussed radiation risks from cell antennas/towers or wireless smart meters, and health risks from Wi-Fi exposure, wireless devices or wearables. CBS and its affiliates have provided the most news coverage about wireless radiation and health reporting on safety issues related to cell phones, cell towers, Wi-Fi, and smart meters. Besides CBS national news, almost all major CBS stations ran stories including stations in Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Charleston, Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, New York, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, San Antonio, San Francisco, Spokane, and Washington, DC. CBS was the only TV network to cover last year's two major wireless policy developments: the International EMF Scientist Appeal and the Berkeley cell phone "Right to Know" ordinance. With the recent publication of Norm Alster's book,"Captured agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is dominated by the industries it presumably regulates," it is time for CBS 60 Minutes to do an investigative story about why our government has not updated the obsolete wireless regulations adopted in 1996 that fail to protect the health of the American public. The above results are based upon Google searches for TV news stories about wireless radiation health risks where the video was posted online; thus, the actual amount of TV news coverage is underestimated.
"The award-winning documentary Take Back Your Power uncovers the shocking story behind why hundreds of local governments are standing against the multi-billion dollar rollout of ‘smart’ utility meters. Take a journey of revelation, examining evidence of in-home privacy invasions, systemic over-billing, extortion, health & environmental harm, fires and unprecedented hacking vulnerability. And be inspired by emerging solutions.
With compelling insight from whistleblowers, government agents, lawyers, doctors, researchers and environmentalists, Take Back Your Power investigates the claimed benefits and emerging risks of a profit-based global initiative that seeks to change the way we live. What you’ll discover will surprise, unsettle and ultimately empower you.
Release Information The original edition (Director’s cut, 102 mins) of Take Back Your Power was released worldwide on September 5, 2013.
The 2014 Edition (final cut, 88 mins) was released in June 2014 – with new scenes, a shorter running time of 88 minutes, and Spanish, French and English subtitles.
As of December 2014, Take Back Your Power has been seen in more than 180 venues worldwide.
Poster Awards Winner, Leo Award, Best Feature Documentary Program in British Columbia (link) Winner, AwareGuide Transformational Film of the Year (link) Winner, IndieFest Annual Humanitarian Award (link)Film Details
Exhibition Formats: DVD (NTSC and PAL), MOV file (1920×1080), and DCP. Print Details: Color, Stereo Runtime: 88 minutes (2014 Edition) / 102 minutes (Original Director’s Cut) ISBN: 978-0-615-97835-2 Aspect Ratio: 16×9 Date of Completion: June 2014 (2014 Edition) / August 2013 (Original Director’s Cut) Countries of Production: Canada, USA Countries of Filming: Australia, Canada, USA, United Kingdom Production Budget & Funding: $200,000 USD Funding sources: Private investments, crowd-funding (including indiegogo)
Josh del Sol is the director and producer of Take Back Your Power: Investigating the “Smart” Grid, his first feature-length film. Take Back Your Power has in 2014 been named winner of the AwareGuide Transformational Film of the Year, the Indie Fest Annual Humanitarian Award, and Leo Award for Best Feature Documentary (British Columbia).
Born and raised near Vancouver BC, Josh is passionate about the growing movement of social awakening, and has a vision for a more equitable social structure with decentralized energy production and technology which harmonizes with biological life and rights. Josh finds inspiration in those of courage who speak truth to power, from a place of non-violence and vision, laying the foundation for necessary solutions. His hobbies include hiking, research, travel and meditation. He lives in Washington State with his wife and daughter. Josh can be reached through our contact us page.
"Cancer constitutes a major challenge to development, undermining social and economic advances throughout the world. Approximately 38 million people worldwide die of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) every year, with more than 8 million of them dying from cancer.
This infographic focuses on the increasing cancer burden in developing and developed nations. It also highlights the disproportionate funding allocated to address these staggering statistics and steps you can take to advocate for change today."
SAN FRANCISCO (KPIX 5) – Some Bay Area residents feel like David fighting Goliath. They don’t want RF-emitting cell towers all over their neighborhoods. But the wireless industry says they need them to keep up with demand, and the industry usually gets its way.
10-year old Eoghan Gormley wants his voice heard. He’s the youngest of a group of residents trying to stop Verizon from installing mini-cell towers, in some cases, right outside their windows.
“The proposed site for the antenna that Verizon seeks to install is right outside my front window. In addition, there is an antenna is less than 150 feet from my classroom. This means that I will be exposed to radio frequency emissions 24 hours a day, 7 days a week,” Eoghan told the San Francisco Appeals Board.
But the Federal Communication Act says you can’t consider health concerns as long as wireless companies follow FCC radiation guidelines that haven’t been updated since 1996.
So the only way to win is on a technicality. And of the hundreds of challenges over the years, five families were the first to win at the San Francisco appeals board, based on a technicality regarding lack of notice. But now they’re back, after Verizon’s cell tower installer, Crown Castle appealed the appeal.
To date, no one has successfully stopped a cell tower installation, thanks in part to a single line, snuck into the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 that has nothing to do with jobs. It states that local governments may not deny and shall approve any qualifying request to install cell phone towers.
“It only makes sense in the context of a government that is influenced and owned by these large interest groups,” said Dan Newman. He runs Maplight.org, a non-profit that tracks money’s influence on politics.
His group crunched the numbers and found AT&T alone spent a whopping $124 million lobbying the Federal Government since 2008. Verizon came in a close second at $118 million. He says, not only did thathelp to buy them protection from local challenges, it also bought them influence on the very agency that is supposed to regulate wireless companies.
“Appointments to powerful regulatory agencies in Washington like the FCC have to be approved by influential members of Congress, and those members of Congress are exactly the targets of all the lobbying campaign contributions by the wireless industries,” said Newman.
He says for example, the former chairman of the CTIA Wireless Association, Tom Wheeler, now heads up the Federal Communications Commission. And former FCC commissioner Meredith Baker is now the CEO of the CTIA.
In a statement, the FCC writes “Chairman Wheeler is a proven advocate for consumers…and has held the wireless industry accountable for violations of the commission’s rules.”
However, in its statement the wireless industry points out that the FCC still said “There is no reason to believe towers could constitute a potential health hazard.”
It’s been nearly 20 years since the FCC has examined Wi-Fi or cell phone radiation guidelines in spite of world-wide petitions from environmental scientists to re-examine safe exposure levels.
“I mean, think about how absurd it is that citizens aren’t able to speak or bring up or have health concerns,” said Newman.
Back at the appeals board, residents got a second reprieve. Commissioners stood by their decision to deny Verizon’s permit for five cell towers in the neighborhood. But residents aren’t hopeful the victory will last.
“They’re going to close this technical loophole, and they will just apply again,” said resident Ludwig Chincarini. Verizon and Crown Castle had no comment.
Turns out that victory was short-lived. Following the hearing, the city closed that loophole. Verizon re-applied and was re-issued permits for those five cell sites.
The attached is a talk given by Dr. Leszczynski for the working group Abyrg notkun UT at the Reykjavik City Department of Education. The presentation discussed possible/probable effects of radiation emitted by the wireless communication devices on human health. Presented were, briefly, IARC 2011 classification and the post-classification research, in context of the introduction of the wi-fi equipment in schools.
Recommendation is that the Precautionary Principle should be implemented and the internet in schools should be provided preferentially via wired connections instead of wireless, for the time being, when there is no sufficient science available on how, if at all, the long-term exposures to wi-fi might affect children.
The presentation, both slides and audio of presentation and discussion, are available from this Vimeo link.
"Professor Emeritus Martin Pall, PhD, in an hour-long interview describes a biologic mechanism by which the microwave radiation emitted by cell phones, cordless phones, Wi-Fi, wireless baby monitors, smart meters, cell phone towers, and other wireless devices can harm us as well as other species.
Dr. Pall recently published four peer-reviewed papers that explain how exposure to low-intensity (i.e., non-thermal) pulsed electromagnetic fields opens voltage-gated calcium channels in cell membranes allowing excess calcium to penetrate the cells. This increases nitric oxide and superoxide in the cells, leading to production of free radicals, oxidative stress, and DNA damage. Potential health effects include cancer, male and female infertility, neurodegenerative disease, neuropsychiatric conditions, and electromagnetic hypersensitivity. In addition, microwave radiation in conjunction with specific chemical exposures may increase autism risk.
According to Dr. Pall, twenty-six studies have found that the effects of electromagnetic fields on voltage-gated calcium channels in cell membranes can be eliminated by administering calcium channel blockers.
Dr Pall advocates for the adoption of biologically-based radio frequency standards to replace the obsolete standards which only control for thermal effects that were adopted by the Federal Communications Commission in 1996.
References The following are all open access papers:
Pall ML. Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression. J Chem Neuroanat. Aug 21, 2015. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26300312
Pall ML. Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency electromagnetic field action. Rev Envir Health. 2015; 30(2):99-116.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25879308
Pall ML. Electromagnetic field activation of voltage-gated calcium channels: role in therapeutic effects. Electromagn Biol Med. 2014; 33(4):251. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24712750
Pall ML. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med. 2013; J Cell Mol Med. 2013; 17(8):958-965. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23802593
"This study aimed to (a) explore the stability of changes in mobile phone addiction and depressive symptoms across time and (b) clarify the direction of reciprocal longitudinal relationships between mobile phone addiction and depressive symptoms among Korean adolescents. We analyzed three-year longitudinal data from the Korean Children and Youth Panel Survey conducted by the National Youth Policy Institute in Korea. A total of 1877 valid responses from 2011 to 2013 were analyzed using autoregressive cross-lagged modeling. We found that each mobile phone addiction and depressive symptom in earlier years was associated with increasing severity in these conditions consistently over the three years. In addition, we found that the relationships between mobile phone addiction and depressive symptoms were bidirectional over the three years. The significant implications for these findings in the context of adolescent behavior are also discussed.
"LE SMACKDOWN EN WIFI: A new law in France bans Wi-Fi in childcare facilities, bans all advertising targeting children under 14, and requires the use of hand-free kits to be recommended.
"Two years in the works, a new law governing public exposure to electromagnetic fields generated by wireless technology (including base stations, mobile phones, tablets, and WiFi) was adopted by the Members of the National Assembly (MNAs) on Thursday, January 29. It was passed by a majority vote, while the UDI Party abstained – except Bertrand Pancher (Meuse), who voted in favor. The UMP voted against it, seeing it as an barrier to the development of digital industries.
This new law – the first in France to establish a precautionary approach addressing the potential health risks of radio frequencies – is the result of a real obstacle course, during which its initial ambitions were seriously downgraded. The Bill, filed in January 2013 by the MNA for Val-de-Marne Laurence Abeille (Europe Ecologie-Greens) had been referred to committee by the Socialists, before returning to the National Assembly in January 2014, under a watered-down form, and then to be adopted in first reading by the Senate in June 2014.
Despite these successive setbacks, the environmental group decided to submit the Bill to a vote as is, to prevent its return to the Senate where it would have suffered new delays and probably additional knife strokes. Its adoption is thus final. Ms. Abeille stated, “the application decrees will be able to be taken without further delay”.
A major point is the introduction into French law a principle of “sobriety” of public exposure to electromagnetic fields. However, virtuous as it is, this principle remains vague and non-binding: while the original Bill was aimed to scale back radiation exposure to“as low as reasonably possible” or 0.6 volts per meter, or V/m (approx 0.1 µW/cm2), this was not successfully included in the final version. Depending on the frequency, the limit of radiation exposure in France is between 41 and 61 V/m (approx 455-955 µW/cm2).
Hot Spots
The National Frequency Agency (AFNR) will nevertheless make every year a national census of “atypical points” or “places where the level of public exposure substantially exceeds that generally observed at the national scale”. Network operators will have to remedy them within six months, “subject to technical feasibility”.
The average exposure in France is now about 1 V/m, but a study of the Operations Committee on mobile waves (Copic), covering sixteen municipal representative of the French territory and published in 2013, reported some exposure peaks “up to 10 V/m at maximum transmitter power”, even if the levels remained below 0.7 V/m in 90% of cases. The AFNR considers up to now as atypical places where exposure exceeds 6 V/m (approx 9.5 µW/cm2).
To establish transparency, the installation of antennas will now be subject to prior notice to mayors and presidents of regional-municipal bodies, who may if they choose organize a consultation with residents. In addition, a campaign of “awareness and information on the responsible and rational use of mobile devices” will be conducted.
Wi-Fi Prohibited in Daycare Centers
A section of the Act is devoted to the protection of babies. Wireless devices will be banned in “the spaces dedicated to the care, resting and activities of children under 3 years”, that is to say, nurseries and daycare centers. However, contrary to the initial desire of safety proponents, Wi-Fi will remain permitted in primary schools. It will however be disabled for activities other than “digital educational activities“.
Finally, the often-dramatic situation of people suffering from electro-hypersenitivity receives a first consideration. The government will have to submit a report to Parliament on this issue within a year.
There is no immediate indication yet how this new law will affect the rollout of “smart” utility meters in France, which typically emit radiation pulses thousands of times stronger than a cell phone.
Even though there was much comprised in the end, leading advocates consider the glass half full rather than half empty. “This act, which is the first dedicated to the issue of electromagnetic waves and their impact on the environment and health, marks a first step in the legal recognition of the need to regulate the development of mobile phone communications and all wireless applications,” says the association for the regulation of mobile phone base stations (Priartem). In its view, “this first legislative effort must be an encouragement to go further in protecting people”.
Calls for Caution
This act arrives in a context of accelerated development of sources of electromagnetic fields, in particular with the deployment of very high-speed 4G mobile communications. Aa of January 1st 2015, ANFR indicates the number of 4G base station sites authorized in France was, for all operators, 18,699 – compared to 12,525 a year earlier – and 15,424 are in service.
While there is still no official scientific consensus around the potential health risks from radiofrequencies, many studies and opinions have called for caution. In 2011, the World Health Organization (WHO) classified them as “possibly carcinogenic” . And in 2013, the National Agency Health Safety of Food, Environment and Labour (ANSES) recommended to “limit exposure of the population to radiofrequencies – especially from mobile phones – especially for children and heavy users”. It also called for “controlling the overall exposure from base stations”.
* * *
Commentary:
Today the French Parliament passed a law addressing electromagnetic fields and electromagnetic hypersensitivity. While the new law does not go nearly far enough, it is the first of its kind in the world. Among its provisions are the following:
1. Anyone who intends to build one or more radio installations regulated by the ANFR (France’s equivalent of the FCC) must submit to the local government, if requested by the mayor, calculations of electromagnetic fields that will be generated. This information must be made available to the public.
2. A national dialogue committee on levels of public exposure to electromagnetic fields is created within the ANFR. This committee will give information to all stakeholders. The ANFR will give annual reports to the dialogue committee on the results of all electromagnetic field measurements in France as well as measures taken to reduce exposure levels at “atypical” locations where the levels are greater than usual. The ANFR will compile a annual census of atypical exposure locations and periodically report on measures taken to reduce exposure at such locations.
3. Within one year from today, the ANFR will produce a municipal-level map of all cell towers in France.
4. Any advertisement for cell phones must mention, clearly and legibly, the recommended use of an accessory device that reduces exposure of the head to radio frequency radiation. Violators are subject to a fine of 75,000 euros.
5. Advertisements promoting the use of cell phones without such accessories are prohibited. Violators are subject to a fine of 75,000 euros.
6. Anyone selling a cell phone must provide, upon request, an accessory designed for children under 14 years of age that reduces exposure of the head to radio frequency radiation.
7. Wireless internet is prohibited in places dedicated to the welcome, rest, and activities of children under 3 years of age.
8. Wireless access for internet in elementary schools must be disabled when not in use for teaching.
9. One year from today, the government shall submit to the Parliament a report on electromagnetic hypersensitivity.
"This video provides a simple, yet profound lesson. The radio frequency radiation being transmitted from your wireless router or modem is extremely toxic and detrimental to your health. Notice how high the measurements are on the RF meter"...
"A simple and important explanation of Wi-Fi technology for parents, teachers and administrators.
In 2004 a Swiss mobile carrier patented a router design that was intended to reduce or eliminate part of the radiation emitted by Wi-Fi routers and transmitters due to cancer concerns/DNA damage. Watch the 5 minute video.
To get content containing either thought or leadership enter:
To get content containing both thought and leadership enter:
To get content containing the expression thought leadership enter:
You can enter several keywords and you can refine them whenever you want. Our suggestion engine uses more signals but entering a few keywords here will rapidly give you great content to curate.
Your new post is loading...
![Take Back Your Power [Documentary] // Josh del Sol | Screen Time, Tech Safety & Harm Prevention Research | Scoop.it](https://img.scoop.it/zHG0cUUPf0JkAwLGS-EDtTl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVvK0kTmF0xjctABnaLJIm9)
